Predicting the Burst Pressure of High-Strength Carbon Steel Pipe with Gouge Flaws Using Artificial Neural Network
Publication: Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 11, Issue 4
Abstract
Predicting the failure pressure of pipelines is of paramount importance in design and integrity management in order for pipes to operate safely, efficiently, and cost-effectively in terms of repair costs. Given the increasing use of pipelines as high-strength materials, an accurate assessment of defective pipelines is of major importance. This study used data mining to investigate the burst pressure of pipelines containing gouge flaws. The required database was collected using nonlinear finite-element analysis. An artificial neural network method was adopted to predict the burst pressure in a gouged pipeline. The methods used in the artificial neural network are the multilayer perceptron (MLP) and support vector regression (SVR) by spline and Gaussian kernels. Finally, these methods were verified by a full-scale burst test, and the results were compared with those of other methods. The results indicated that the SVR Gaussian kernel had an accurate correlation with the results of the full-scale burst test data. However, the MLP results were less accurate than those of the Gaussian kernel. Moreover, the SVR model using the Gaussian kernel, as compared to other previous models, had the highest accuracy in predicting the burst pressure of high-strength pipelines with gouge defects.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are available from the corresponding author by request:
•
Finite-element analysis
•
MLP-ANN toolbox MATLAB code
•
SVR-ANN with Gaussian kernel MATLAB code
•
SVR-ANN with spline kernel MATLAB code
•
Genetic algorithm MATLAB code
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the National Iranian South Oil Company (NISOC) through Project 97-KD-1328. The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial and technical support of NISOC and its experts.
References
API (American Petroleum Institute). 2004. 5L, specification for line pipe. Washington, DC: API.
API (American Petroleum Institute). 2007. 579-1/ASME FFS-1: Fitness-for-service. Washington, DC: API.
ASME. 1991. Manual for determining the remaining strength of corroded pipelines: A supplement to ASME B31 code for pressure piping. New York: ASME.
Chauhan, V., and J. Crossley. 2009. “Corrosion assessment guidance for high strength steels (phase 1).” Accessed June 2, 2020. https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/matrix/FilGet.rdm?fil=4877.
Choi, J. B., B. K. Goo, J. C. Kim, Y. J. Kim, and W. S. Kim. 2003. “Development of limit load solutions for corroded gas pipelines.” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Pip. 80 (2): 121–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-0161(03)00005-X.
Cortes, C., and V. Vapnik. 1995. “Support-vector networks.” Mach. Learn. 20 (3): 273–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994018.
El-Abbasy, M. S., A. Senouci, T. Zayed, L. Parvizsedghy, and F. Mirahadi. 2014. “Unpiggable oil and gas pipeline condition forecasting models.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 30 (1): 04014202. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000716.
Freire, J. L. F., R. D. Vieira, J. T. P. Castro, and A. C. Benjamin. 2006. “Part 3: Burst tests of pipeline with extensive longitudinal metal loss.” Exp. Tech. 30 (6): 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1567.2006.00109.x.
Fu, B., and A. D. Batte. 1999. “New methods for assessing the remaining strength of corroded pipelines.” In Proc., EPRG/PRCI 12th Biennial Joint Technical Meeting on Pipeline Research. Windsor, Berkshire: British Gas.
Haykin, S. 1998. Neural networks. A comprehensive foundation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kiefner, J. F., and P. H. Vieth. 1989. A modified criterion for evaluating the remaining strength of corroded pipe.. Columbus, OH: Battelle Columbus Division.
Ma, B., J. Shuai, D. Liu, and K. Xu. 2013. “Assessment on failure pressure of high strength pipeline with corrosion defects.” Eng. Fail. Anal. 32 (Sep): 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2013.03.015.
Najafi, M., and G. Kulandaivel. 2005. “Pipeline condition prediction using neural network models.” In Proc., Pipelines 2005: Optimizing Pipeline Design, Operations, and Maintenance in Today’s Economy, 767–781. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Safari, S., and M. Aliyari Shoorehdeli. 2018. “Detection and isolation of interior defects based on image processing and neural networks: HDPE pipeline case study.” J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract. 9 (2): 05018001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000311.
Samui, P. 2008. “Support vector machine applied to settlement of shallow foundations on cohesionless soils.” Comput. Geotech. 35 (3): 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2007.06.014.
Silva, R. C. C., J. N. C. Guerreiro, and A. F. D. Loula. 2007. “A study of pipe interacting corrosion defects using the FEM and neural networks.” Adv. Eng. Software 38 (11–12): 868–875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2006.08.047.
Veritas, D. N. 2004. Recommended practice DNV-RP-F101 corroded pipelines, 11. Oslo, Norway: Det Norske Veritas.
Wilkowski, G., D. Stephens, P. Krishnaswamy, B. Leis, and D. Rudland. 2000. “Progress in development of acceptance criteria for local thinned areas in pipe and piping components.” Nucl. Eng. Des. 195 (2): 149–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-5493(99)00245-9.
Xu, W.-Z., C. B. Li, J. Choung, and J. M. Lee. 2017. “Corroded pipeline failure analysis using artificial neural network scheme.” Adv. Eng. Software 112 (Oct): 255–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.05.006.
Yeom, K. J., Y. K. Lee, K. H. Oh, and W. S. Kim. 2015. “Integrity assessment of a corroded API X70 pipe with a single defect by burst pressure analysis.” Eng. Fail. Anal. 57 (Nov): 553–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2015.07.024.
Zangenehmadar, Z., and O. Moselhi. 2016. “Assessment of remaining useful life of pipelines using different artificial neural networks models.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 30 (5): 04016032. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000886.
Zhang, S.-H., D. W. Zhao, and X. N. Wang. 2014. “Influence of yield-to-tensile strength ratio (Y/T) on failure assessment of defect-free and corroded X70 steel pipeline.” J. Cent. South Univ. Technol. 21 (2): 460–465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-014-1960-1.
Zhu, X.-K., and B. N. Leis. 2003. “Strength criteria and analytic predictions of failure pressure in corroded line pipes.” In Proc., 13th Int. Offshore and Polar Engineering Conf. Columbus, OH: International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers.
Zhu, X.-K., and B. N. Leis. 2005. “Influence of yield-to-tensile strength ratio on failure assessment of corroded pipelines.” J. Pressure Vessel Technol. 127 (4): 436–442. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2042481.
Zhu, X.-K., and B. N. Leis. 2006. “Average shear stress yield criterion and its application to plastic collapse analysis of pipelines.” Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip. 83 (9): 663–671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2006.06.001.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 11 • Issue 4 • November 2020
Copyright
©2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jun 25, 2019
Accepted: Mar 31, 2020
Published online: Jun 24, 2020
Published in print: Nov 1, 2020
Discussion open until: Nov 24, 2020
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.